|
Korg Forums A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world. Moderated Independently. Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Liviou2004 Platinum Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017 Posts: 1150 Location: France
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
GregC Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002 Posts: 9451 Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am the skeptic. I need solid audio proof that any such 'upgrade' has a tangible audio benefit.
And also, I don't want any tradeoffs- if a more powerful Kronos is a hotter running Kronos and an unstable Kronos, no thanks.
CPU meters not bouncing is not enough for me. There are 'theoretical ' assertions that more DIY hardware will have a certain result. a 5 second savings in boot up time is not a priority, for example.
I realize my skepticism will annoy. But I need to see what the actual goal is plus a tangible audio improvement. _________________ Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
danmusician Platinum Member
Joined: 08 Apr 2009 Posts: 875 Location: Southern PA
|
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GregC wrote: | I am the skeptic. I need solid audio proof that any such 'upgrade' has a tangible audio benefit. |
Or any real benefit at all. Given that the Kronos X and Kronos 2 both have better motherboards than the original and the fact that Korg did not write the OS to take advantage of any improved specs, why would this DIY make a difference? _________________ Kronos 2 88, Kronos Classic 73, PX-5S, Kronos 2 61, Roli Seaboard Rise 49 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GregC Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002 Posts: 9451 Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danmusician wrote: | GregC wrote: | I am the skeptic. I need solid audio proof that any such 'upgrade' has a tangible audio benefit. |
Or any real benefit at all. Given that the Kronos X and Kronos 2 both have better motherboards than the original and the fact that Korg did not write the OS to take advantage of any improved specs, why would this DIY make a difference? |
I have make that similar point in the past. A real DIY upgrade would involve re-writing the Linux kernel/OS.
A complex task IMO. And for what goal ? _________________ Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KK Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 Posts: 1422
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Totally agree with the previous replies.
This "upgrade" implies that one is willing to accept that :
1) This single guy knows almost as much or even more than the whole Korg team who developed the Kronos for several years. Yeah, sure.
2) You are ready to sacrifice the stability and software integrity of your expensive musical instrument in exchange for very small advantages, supposing of course that they work and that you won't do any mistake in the process, the most interesting one being a 300 Mb of RAM gain. Like trying an experimental type of pill for headaches instead of Tylenol, but which includes side effects like possible heart attack.
3) The video proves nothing. Anyone can modify the original patch without any effect and zeroing other things and then show this "gain/advantage".
I also remember reading a similar topic here in the past with possibly the very same guy, who ended up banned because he was basically saying how great he was as a programmer, recoding the Kronos, blablabla, but of course never really answering anyone with vague explanations when people wanted to know more. Then later in his topic he started bashing Korg at every reply and became very rude at anyone doubting or arguing with him about his "knowledge". Conclusion : trust noone, Mr Mulder. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Liviou2004 Platinum Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017 Posts: 1150 Location: France
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Very interesting and solid arguments, especially considering he is the only guy who speaks about this manipulation !! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SeedyLee Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 1370 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
I feel like there's lots of baseless criticism here that's not really warranted. What he has described isn't really out of the realm of possibility. I have hacked around with the Kronos enough to know that what he is saying is mostly pretty on-point. I have Dropbear SSH running on my Kronos and I can access a remote shell and validate a lot of what he's saying.
Suggesting that a lot of gains couldn't be achieved without "rewriting the Linux kernel" is absolute hogwash.
Also suggesting that what this guy has done is unlikely because "how could he know more than Korg's engineers" also doesn't really stack up for a few reasons. Firstly, motherboards such as the one he used only became available write before the Kronos was released, it would have been too late to incorporate them at that stage. Secondly, he's not actually changed that much. All he's done is recompiled the kernel with support for slightly different hardware, but mostly kept it compatible. A lot of the stuff he had to do wasn't because Korg were clueless, but for two other reasons:
Firstly, Korg violate the GPL in several places.
Secondly, Korg have implemented a lot of their copy protection, which also makes using the Kronos software with a non-Korg sourced Linux kernel, difficult. This is in part where the GPL violation comes in.
I can see no technical reason why what he has suggested wouldn't work. From Korg's perspective it makes sense to make voice allocation dynamic. That's exactly what the job of a RTOS scheduler is. It also makes sense to have it defined in a userland file so that, should a later hardware upgrade be offered with significantly greater processor compatibility, the same software can be used between users.
A lot of the stuff on kronos hackers is also based on work by Marcan.st, who is pretty respected in the hardware hacking community.
Incidentally, I think the other guy in these forums that made all sorts of unfounded claims about his greatness was Hexler. He was a trip. He had a bit of experience hacking around with MSDOS and assumed all his knowledge would just transfer over to Linux and embedded systems and make him the greatest hacker alive. _________________ Current Equipment:
Korg Kronos 2 88, Reface CS, Roland JV-1080, TE OP1, Moog Subsequent 37, Korg ARP Odyssey, Allen & Heath Zed 18, Adam F5, MOTU MIDI Express XT, Lexicon MX200 & MPX1, Yamaha QY700, Yamaha AW16G, Tascam DP008ex, Zoom H6, Organelle, Roland J6 & JU06A
Previous: Triton LE 61/Sampling/64MB/4GB SCSI, MS2000BR, Kronos 1 61, Monotribe, NanoKontrol, NanoKeys, Kaossilator II, Casio HT3000, Roland VP-03, Reface DX, Novation Mininova, MPC One |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Poseidon Senior Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018 Posts: 373
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SeedyLee wrote: | I feel like there's lots of baseless criticism here that's not really warranted. What he has described isn't really out of the realm of possibility. I have hacked around with the Kronos enough to know that what he is saying is mostly pretty on-point. I have Dropbear SSH running on my Kronos and I can access a remote shell and validate a lot of what he's saying.
Suggesting that a lot of gains couldn't be achieved without "rewriting the Linux kernel" is absolute hogwash.
Also suggesting that what this guy has done is unlikely because "how could he know more than Korg's engineers" also doesn't really stack up for a few reasons. Firstly, motherboards such as the one he used only became available write before the Kronos was released, it would have been too late to incorporate them at that stage. Secondly, he's not actually changed that much. All he's done is recompiled the kernel with support for slightly different hardware, but mostly kept it compatible. A lot of the stuff he had to do wasn't because Korg were clueless, but for two other reasons:
Firstly, Korg violate the GPL in several places.
Secondly, Korg have implemented a lot of their copy protection, which also makes using the Kronos software with a non-Korg sourced Linux kernel, difficult. This is in part where the GPL violation comes in.
I can see no technical reason why what he has suggested wouldn't work. From Korg's perspective it makes sense to make voice allocation dynamic. That's exactly what the job of a RTOS scheduler is. It also makes sense to have it defined in a userland file so that, should a later hardware upgrade be offered with significantly greater processor compatibility, the same software can be used between users.
A lot of the stuff on kronos hackers is also based on work by Marcan.st, who is pretty respected in the hardware hacking community.
Incidentally, I think the other guy in these forums that made all sorts of unfounded claims about his greatness was Hexler. He was a trip. He had a bit of experience hacking around with MSDOS and assumed all his knowledge would just transfer over to Linux and embedded systems and make him the greatest hacker alive. |
Well said !
I add -
that the world belongs to adventurous people.
There is more to gain than to loose.
Doing this hack will not cause any harm to your Kronos.
Anyone who’s got a knowledge and guts should go ahead.
And I will do just that in the near future.
But before I wanna see if a replacement of CPU (Atom D2500 for D2700) will bring any gains.
I already have the original motherboard and D2700 on stand by. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GregC Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002 Posts: 9451 Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am sticking with the context of the O/P
I need to be shown exact improvement results and hear them as well [ where possible]. a 2 minute youTube isn't enough. There is a much bigger picture.
I am aware that folks that have strong technical skills will apply them to Kronos. I have zero problem with them doing so - its their keyboard, etc etc.
That said, no one said being different was going to be easy in this day and age.
I save my adventures for creating music. _________________ Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NormC Full Member
Joined: 09 Jun 2015 Posts: 158
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I saw a couple years ago on Marcan's blog was very promising but it is not something the average DIY person could do and some of his "coding" to get around Korg's security may be illegal or at least in violation of Korg's license to use their software. _________________ Kronos 2 73 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GregC Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002 Posts: 9451 Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NormC wrote: | What I saw a couple years ago on Marcan's blog was very promising but it is not something the average DIY person could do and some of his "coding" to get around Korg's security may be illegal or at least in violation of Korg's license to use their software. |
that was my impression, too.
I don't believe Korg's approach to the IP of the OS was ' c'mon down and have at it '. And then brag about it on youTube, then sell it to hopeful Kronos owners.
That said, what an owner does with his keyboard is not the debate. Its the slippery slope of promoting it , progressing to the commercial realm.
99% of all work done is motivated by money. Some will argue 95% or 99.5%.
Just my experience of the world we live in. _________________ Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SeedyLee Platinum Member
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 1370 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a tricky one, because Korg actually broke the license for the Linux kernel by making modifications to it, but then not releasing those modifications as required under the GPL.
Circumventing the security checks on the Kronos (probably?) doesn't require modifying or even disassembling Korg's proprietary software at all, as a lot of the security mechanisms are in the open-source Linux kernel. I'm not sure what case Korg could make given they themselves didn't respect intellectual property they used to secure their product. _________________ Current Equipment:
Korg Kronos 2 88, Reface CS, Roland JV-1080, TE OP1, Moog Subsequent 37, Korg ARP Odyssey, Allen & Heath Zed 18, Adam F5, MOTU MIDI Express XT, Lexicon MX200 & MPX1, Yamaha QY700, Yamaha AW16G, Tascam DP008ex, Zoom H6, Organelle, Roland J6 & JU06A
Previous: Triton LE 61/Sampling/64MB/4GB SCSI, MS2000BR, Kronos 1 61, Monotribe, NanoKontrol, NanoKeys, Kaossilator II, Casio HT3000, Roland VP-03, Reface DX, Novation Mininova, MPC One |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Poseidon Senior Member
Joined: 08 Jul 2018 Posts: 373
|
Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
GregC wrote: |
99% of all work done is motivated by money. Some will argue 95% or 99.5%.
Just my experience of the world we live in. |
i must disagree with you on it, simply because there is no market for it ( Korg Kronos)
It’s like “Hackintosh” community, people do that for any reason but not profits.
Another good example are mobile phones.
I actually have mine rooted, and not for profit but to have AFWall+ installed only. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|